Sunday, 30 March 2008

Fitna the Movie: Dutch Politician's film about the Quran(UPDATED with replacement video)

The mad Mullahs, junk Jihadists and irritated Islamists have threatened death on the staff of LiveLeak, where I posted a copy of the Film "Fitna" on Friday ,( go here and click on video for explanation by LiveLeak) and they have removed the film as a result.

The making of the movie, which tells it like it is, has been widely condemned by Muslims around the world but its the thrust of the message that Muslims have for the West that lays largely intact and free from similar condemnation by those same people.

That the non believers are infidels and must be wiped off the face of the earth.

Geert Wilder's film had been  generously posted on youtube but has been removed because of pressure from Mad Islamists.

Luckily I have found another copy at Clipser and posted it again. Cross your fingers it doesn't get taken down .

Saturday, 29 March 2008

Earth Day: Turn on,tune out, buy some candles

In the interest of sanity,reason, intellectual honesty and beating Al Gore to a bloodied death with a chunk of Antarctic ice smuggled into the country up the arse of a whale sympathetic to my cause, I propose a ying to the preposterous yang of something called "earth hour" which starts in New Zealand first at 8.00pm (NZ time).

proposal is this. At 8.00pm sharp, when the dolphin loving, Volvo driving, mung bean eating, bearded female, non smoking, non drinking, Leo Dio loving, vegetarian, hairy arm pitted, sandal wearing , finger pointing, lesbian school teachers are sitting in the dark with all their lights out for an hour, playing with the insert appropriate expletive here next to them, I will turn on every light, appliance and electrical device that I can lay my meat eating, chain smoking, 6 litre V8 Holden driving hands on... for two hours.

Even if this Global warming-or Climate Change, as they are now calling it,because the planet is actually cooling-was true, turning the lights off for an hour is actually what is going to happen for real if these climate change junkies get their way and have windmills dotted all over the place and they stop us from using lovely black coal, gas and oil to keep us alive. This is their intention.

In New Zealand, David Parker, Minister for "Climate Change" , bogey men and tooth fairies, proposes that we only build "renewable" power sources from this day on and forget about real sources of energy like hydro and gas.

We do however export coal to other countries and import the same from Indonesia, do those carbon miles get you a new power station when you get to a billion points?

I'm relaxed now in the knowledge that I am going to do my bit tonight to save our collective sanity. If you are flying across Auckland's North Shore, I think you might be able to spot me.

I will be the one with my feet up on the Brazilian rainforest timber table, in the living room, watching BBC4s "The Great Global Warming Swindle", the house humming, with a power surge so immense, I will be able to supply energy to all those lesser folk in their houses with all the lights turned off.

Do the earth a favour then, engage your brain before turning off those sparkly, modern, gas and oil fired wonders, your lights.

Friday, 28 March 2008

Fitna the Movie: Dutch Politician's film about the Quran

What is with the Dutch and their wish to end their lives by abusing the great Allah?

A controversial movie? not sure about that. If one tells it like it is how can the film be controversial, isn't it more like the subject matter that critics should be more upset about?

That is, the Muslim religion is violent,abusive, murderous and has expansion on its mind, at any cost.

These sorts of "events" tend to galvanise people on one side or the other but they do serve to do two good things. To tell the truth, and get people talking about the "muslim issue".

Very important considering the Jihad that the West has out on it and the appeasement by our local politicians in this country to some of the creeping Islamic cultural demands that New Zealand Muslims have their hands out for.

Film originally posted on

Related Political Animal reading

Reaction to Muslim cartoons defended by some
Cartoons depict Muslim faith for what it is

Jihad and Understanding
Having a multiple Muslim

c Political Animal 2008

Friday, 21 March 2008

Iraq Liberation still the right course

The Iraq Liberation was a necessary evil and there has been much said about it and even more written. Those that denied that a Liberation was necessary are hiding the truth.

Clearly mistakes were made in going into Iraq, more troops and firepower were needed initially then after the major hostilities ended quite quickly more troops needed to stay. That is a fact bourne out by the success of the current "surge". I think still more troops are needed but we can go on and on about those things without a resolution so I'm not going to start.

Iraq is a much better place now, than before Saddam, and there is ample proof to back that up.

The 10s of thousands of Iraqis murdered and tortured each year by Saddam and his men has stopped, just one glaringly obvious example! Some of us forget that.

Bush is doing a job that should have been done many years ago and while he isn't perfect, I believe history will judge his decision to go to the Middle East, the correct one.

The USA must not back down now. It will be seen as weakness by the enemy they are fighting. Muslim terrorism.

Any sign of weakness will be punished, from now until many years in the future.

c Political Animal 2008

Christopher Hitchens | March 20, 2008, The Australian

AN anniversary of a war is in many ways the least useful occasion on which to take stock of something like the Anglo-American intervention in Iraq, if only because any such formal observance involves the assumption that a) this is, in fact, a war and b) it is by that definition an exception from the rest of our engagement with that country and that region.

I am one of those who, for example, believes that the global conflict that began in August 1914 did not conclusively end, despite a series of fragile truces, until the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union.

This is not at all to redefine warfare and still less to contextualise it out of existence. But when I wrote the essays that go to make up A Long Short War: The Postponed Liberation of Iraq, I was expressing an impatience with those who thought that hostilities had not really begun until George W. Bush gave a certain order in the spring of 2003.

Anyone with even a glancing acquaintance with Iraq would have to know that a heavy US involvement in the affairs of that country began no later than 1968, with the role played by the CIA in the coup that ultimately brought Saddam Hussein's wing of the Baath Party to power.

Not much more than a decade later, we come across persuasive evidence that the US at the very least acquiesced in the Iraqi invasion of Iran, a decision that helped inflict moral and material damage of an order to dwarf anything that has occurred in either country recently.

In between, we might note minor episodes such as Henry Kissinger's faux support to Kurdish revolutionaries, encouraging them to believe in American support and then abandoning and betraying them in the most brutal and cynical fashion.

If you can bear to keep watching this flickering newsreel, it will take you all the way up to the moment when Saddam, too, switches sides and courts Washington, being most in favour in our nation's capital at the precise moment he is engaged in a campaign of extermination in the northern provinces and retaining this same favour until the moment he decides to engulf his small Kuwaiti neighbour. In every decision taken subsequent to that, from the decision to recover Kuwait and the decision to leave Saddam in power, to the decisions to impose international sanctions on Iraq and the decision to pass the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, stating that long-term coexistence with Saddam's regime was neither possible nor desirable, there was a really quite high level of public participation in our foreign policy.

We were never, if we are honest with ourselves, "lied into war".

We became steadily more aware that the option was continued collusion with Saddam or a decision to have done with him.

The President's speech to the UN on September 12, 2002, laying out the considered case that it was time to face the Iraqi tyrant, too, with this choice, was easily the best speech of his two-term tenure and by far the most misunderstood.

That speech is widely and wrongly believed to have focused on only two aspects of the problem, namely the refusal of Saddam's regime to come into compliance on the resolutions concerning weapons of mass destruction and the involvement of the Baathists with a whole nexus of nihilist and Islamist terror groups.

Baghdad's outrageous flouting of the resolutions on compliance (if not necessarily the maintenance of blatant, as opposed to latent, WMD capacity) remains a huge and easily demonstrable breach of international law. The role of Baathist Iraq in forwarding and aiding the merchants of suicide terror actually proves to be deeper and worse, on the latest professional estimate, than most people had believed or than the Bush administration had suggested.

This is all overshadowed by the unarguable hash that was made of the intervention itself.

But I would nonetheless maintain that this incompetence doesn't condemn the enterprise wholesale.

A much-wanted war criminal was put on public trial.

The Kurdish and Shi'ite majority was rescued from the ever-present threat of a renewed genocide.

A huge, hideous military and party apparatus, directed at internal repression and external aggression was (perhaps overhastily) dismantled.

The largest wetlands in the region, habitat of the historic Marsh Arabs, have been largely recuperated.

Huge fresh oilfields have been found, including in formerly oil-free Sunni provinces, and some important initial investment in them made. Elections have been held, and the outline of a federal system has been proposed as the only alternative to a) a sectarian despotism and b) a sectarian partition and fragmentation. Not unimportantly, a battlefield defeat has been inflicted on al-Qa'ida and its surrogates, who (not without some Baathist collaboration) had hoped to constitute the successor regime in a failed state and an imploded society.

Further afield, a perfectly defensible case can be made that the Syrian Baathists would not have evacuated Lebanon, nor would the Gaddafi gang have turned over Libya's (much larger than anticipated) stock of WMD, if not for the ripple effect of the removal of the region's keystone dictatorship. None of these positive developments took place without a good deal of bungling and cruelty, and unintended consequences of their own.

I don't know of a satisfactory way of evaluating one against the other any more than I quite know how to balance the disgrace of Abu Ghraib, say, against the digging up of Saddam's immense network of mass graves. There is, however, one position that nobody can honestly hold but that many people try their best to hold. And that is what I call the Bishop Berkeley theory of Iraq, whereby if a country collapses and succumbs to trauma, and it's not our immediate fault or direct responsibility, then it doesn't count, and we are not involved.

Nonetheless, the thing that most repels people when they contemplate Iraq, which is the chaos and misery and fragmentation (and the deliberate intensification and augmentation of all this by the jihadis), invites the inescapable question: What would post-Saddam Iraq have looked like without a coalition presence?

The past years have seen us both shamed and threatened by the implications of the Berkeleyan attitude, from Burma to Rwanda to Darfur.

Had we decided to attempt the right thing in those cases (you will notice that I say attempt rather than do, which cannot be known in advance), we could as glibly have been accused of embarking on "a war of choice". But the thing to remember about Iraq is that all or most choice had already been forfeited.

We were already deeply involved in the life and death struggle of that country, and March 2003 happens to mark the only time that we decided to intervene, after a protracted and open public debate, on the right side and for the right reasons. This must, and still does, count for something.

Christopher Hitchens is an author and commentator for publications such as Vanity Fair, The Atlantic Monthly and Slate.

Thursday, 20 March 2008

Reaction to Muslim cartoons defended by some
Lampooning an appropriate subject is fair game

Related Political Animal reading

Cartoons depict Muslim faith for what it is
Jihad and Understanding
Having a multiple Muslim

I was prompted to post this because of two anonymous opinions expressed (scroll down past my post) to comments I made about the wonderfully funny cartoons by the Danish artist who lampooned the Muslim religion, for being violent, cruel and nasty and how those cartoons were vindicated by the nasty, violent,cruel and murderous reaction to them across the Muslim world.

Surely the threat of murder on someone who disagrees with what you have to say about them is reprehensible and therefore the religion that supports such threats is a violent, cruel, filthy and inhuman one that should be condemned at every opportunity.?

One cartoonists reaction to the violent outbursts across the Muslim world
to the original Dutch cartoons.

To have an idea of where I am coming from, I recommend a book By Mark Steyn, America Alone: The End of the World as we know it (see book review below), a brilliant book that outlines the threat the Muslim faith is to a civilised Western world.

America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It

America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It
By Mark Steyn

List Price: $27.95
Price: $18.45 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details

Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Ships from and sold by

50 new or used available from $13.50

Average customer review:

Product Description

In this, his first major book, Mark Steyn--probably the most widely read, and wittiest, columnist in the English-speaking world--takes on the great poison of the twenty-first century: the anti-Americanism that fuels both Old Europe and radical Islam. America, Steyn argues, will have to stand alone. The world will be divided between America and the rest; and for our sake America had better win.

Product Details

  • Amazon Sales Rank: #940 in Books
  • Published on: 2006-09-16
  • Number of items: 1
  • Binding: Hardcover
  • 214 pages

Editorial Reviews

From the Inside Flap
It's the end of the world as we know it…

Someday soon, you might wake up to the call to prayer from a muezzin. Europeans already are.

And liberals will still tell you that "diversity is our strength"—while Talibanic enforcers cruise Greenwich Village burning books and barber shops, the Supreme Court decides sharia law doesn't violate the "separation of church and state," and the Hollywood Left decides to give up on gay rights in favor of the much safer charms of polygamy.

If you think this can't happen, you haven't been paying attention, as the hilarious, provocative, and brilliant Mark Steyn—the most popular conservative columnist in the English-speaking world—shows to devastating effect in this, his first and eagerly awaited new book on American and global politics.

The future, as Steyn shows, belongs to the fecund and the confident. And the Islamists are both, while the West—wedded to a multiculturalism that undercuts its own confidence, a welfare state that nudges it toward sloth and self-indulgence, and a childlessness that consigns it to oblivion—is looking ever more like the ruins of a civilization.

Europe, laments Steyn, is almost certainly a goner. The future, if the West has one, belongs to America alone—with maybe its cousins in brave Australia. But America can survive, prosper, and defend its freedom only if it continues to believe in itself, in the sturdier virtues of self-reliance (not government), in the centrality of family, and in the conviction that our country really is the world's last best hope.

Steyn argues that, contra the liberal cultural relativists, America should proclaim the obvious: we do have a better government, religion, and culture than our enemies, and we should spread America's influence around the world—for our own sake as well as theirs.

Mark Steyn's America Alone is laugh-out-loud funny—but it will also change the way you look at the world. It is sure to be the most talked-about book of the year.

About the Author
Mark Steyn's writing on war, politics, the arts, and culture can be read around the world from the Atlantic Monthly to The Australian. In the United States his column appears in the Chicago Sun-Times, the New York Sun, the Washington Times, the Orange County Register, and other newspapers. He is also National Review's "Happy Warrior," a columnist for the New Criterion, and resident obituarist for the Atlantic Monthly. In Canada, he is senior columnist for the country's newest political magazine, the Western Standard, and literary correspondent for the country's biggest-selling general interest magazine, Maclean's. In addition, he appears in many other publications, from the Jerusalem Post to Hawke's Bay Today in New Zealand. Born in Toronto, he lives in New Hampshire.

Customer Reviews

One of the best I've read5
After a couple pages of reading, I grabbed a highlighter and marked large chunks of each page, then passed the book on to my son. It's so important to understand the demographics involved in the current world situation and Mark Steyn makes it so enjoyable a read.

Repetative but insightful3
By the time I was half way through the book, I was getting tired of it. The information is insightful and thought-provoking but very repetative. I felt like the book should have been a short story length but someone decided to make it novel length instead.
While it is possible to verify most of the information the author cites in the book, it would have been nice if he had included some of his source material for further research.
Overall very good information but not the best writing style for me.

Americans are the only intelligent, strong people in the world?3
It is an interesting read and Mark Steyn is a very good writer.

I enjoy his newspaper columns and pretty much agreed with everything he wrote until he went down this Neo Conservative path to support the foolish second war against Iraq, then when virtually the entire world opposed the US - go it alone war against the people in Iraq, Steyn falls into this defensive line of reasoning that the entire world is wrong, especially weak, dying Old Western Europe and America, implied led by the wise Neo Conservatives are right and must face the evils of the world alone.

Yes, Mark Steyn is on target when he shows idiot PC multi culturalist in the West as... idiot, PC multi culturalists who really don't know much about the real world, haven't studied true history, know nothing about Islam, the brutalities of the Third World and fall into reflex PC responses that "THE WEST" and AMERICA are to blame for all the problems in the world and if certain Muslims groups, Muslim nations do horrible brutalities, no one in the West can blame them, we must blame ourselves.

Mark Steyn is of course right when he warns the West, especially Western Europeans that they have to resist mass Muslim immigration and giving in to the demands of Muslims within their borders. There are no making deals with Islam when it senses weakness and looks to take over schools, neighborhoods, countries, continents.

The main problem with Mark Steyn's America Alone, is a problem that I see with most Jewish Neo Conservatives:

They put out the lie that they - and only they alone are fighting the terrorists, opposing the Islamic extremists and they use brutal smears to attack anyone that doesn't accept their whole program including the foolish Iraq war - Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 - it wasn't an Islamic extremist state. There were no WOMD.

Steyn and most Jewish Neo Conservatives simply ignore all the populist, nationalist and true Conservatives in Europe, the West who have been resisting the Muslim invasions, Islamic extremism in their countries for a long time - the Front National in France, Swiss People's Party, the British National Party, Pym Fortuyn, Pat Buchanan, the Rockford Institute, these patriots get no mention or support from Mark Steyn and the Neo Conservatives because they do not support Israel unconditionally - worse, these patriots are smeared as NAZIs.

But, this is just one point.

America Alone is a well written book and Steyn does a very good job of showing the stupidity of those in the West who aid and abet the Islamic invasion and terror against Westerners in the West.

Related Political Animal reading

Cartoons depict Muslim faith for what it is
Jihad and Understanding
Having a multiple Muslim

C Political Animal 2008

Wednesday, 19 March 2008

Dr Cullen needs to intervene in OCR
The New Zealand Government is happy to intervene where its citizens don't want them
but when it comes to the precipitous economy in relation to lowering interest rates,
Michael Cullen gets blisters on his hands from sitting on them.

Original story from Share Investor Blog

I'm not an interventionist by any stretch of the imagination but our monetary system, for better or worse, is, and so is the present regime that presides over the country's books, the New Zealand Labour party.

The interventionist approach in regard to the Reserve Bank and through the official cash rate(OCR) has led NZ INC, courtesy of drunken overspending and overtaxing by the aforementioned regime, to the highest interest rates in the "developed" world.

The Mike and Helen show has put the country in a very precarious position, given the uncertainty over the global economy and the "credit crunch"(2 days in a row, sorry) has slowed the wheels of commerce globally.

This dastardly duo seem quite pleased that an excuse like the global credit crunch has come around because they are now on a PR offensive to blame any current or future New Zealand downturn on it and not themselves, where the bony finger should be pointing.

The sensible among us know that high interest rate were here 3-4 years ago and then we though a credit crunch was a new chocolate bar bought on time payment.

Like Al Gore's science fiction movie "The Inconvenient Truth", we also know, like that movie, the M and K show lacks consistency and truth. When it comes to the economy we can all remember the Labour Party taking the accolades for the nearly 4% growth we had for a nano second, but they now blame the downturn and any possible downturns on other circumstances.

You cant have it both ways.

Now this government's profligate taxes and spending(they go hand in hand) has put its citizens in such debt that we even outrank those nasty Americans for our debt levels. This debt is primarily in real estate and servicing the high interest debt that bought it.

Higher house prices meant more borrowing on the increased equity, because taxes are so high we had to borrow to survive.

So guess what, now things are in reverse, because of that debt we are in potentially a worse condition than America.

They at least borrowed to buy other sorts of assets beside houses, while we sunk most of ours into houses and plasma TVs.

While we haven't had the extreme reckless lending like America's Sub Prime loans, we have got many thousands of kiwis who have borrowed more than they will be able to service when the shit hitith the fan.

Its hitting now.

NZ$40 billion of mortgages will be refinanced this year alone at close to 10% and others will be higher, the time for intervention is now.

The OCR should have been cut at least a year ago but now there is urgent need for it. An emergency cut to bring it into line with other nations suffering from the sub prime fallout would be a key move in the right direction.

There is no use sitting on your hands waiting "to see what happens" according to Alan Bollard, the Reserve Bank Governor. Decisive action needs to be taken because inflation is the least of his/our worries now.

Like I have said before the OCR is a poor way to maintain an economic system, it doesn't serve its purpose well, but it is all we have at present.

A progressive cut over this year, down to below 6%, starting with a .75 point basis cut will send a good message to the market and business, that lending rates will be somewhat dampened and business will be stimulated when it needs it.

Our socialist government are intervening in every other part of our lives, including the private business world but for the life of me , when we really do need intervention, Micheal Cullen just sits on his calloused hands and blames others for our countries current mis- fortunes.

Get off your arse and do something history boy.

Essential related reading from Share Investor

Global credit squeeze: There is no free lunch
Current Credit crunch a blessing in disguise
Lenders must come clean over losses to restore faith in credit markets

c Share Investor & Political Animal 2008

Sunday, 16 March 2008

Clark's push for Neo Muldoonism deja vu all over again

News out last week that a so-called "anti-obesity" bill put forward by the dangerous, corrupt, carbon footprint waving, anti-free speech, private property/business hating, and tofu munching socialists, the New Zealand Labour party has this correspondent jumping for joy, in a cynical sarcastic, toxic sort of way.

A Labour supporter at last Sunday's Electoral Finance Act protest will have too keep his mouth shut if he is a "junk food"
eater. Labour wants to tax it.

The bill seems to be at the peak of Labour's desires to control the New Zealand populous, as it will restrict, at a whim, by the PC Director of Health or Cabinet, to prescribe what we should be eating.

That means supermarkets could be asked to put the Moro bars under lock and key, the chips behind plate glass and the ice cream in a room where only thin people can buy it with a license and photo ID.

I have joked about this for years, but here is the unfunny part, it looks set to actually happen.

No "junk" food for those of us, like me, who love it.

I mean, give me a motherfucking break, who do these vermin think they are?

Like Micheal Cullen's attack on private owners of Auckland International Airport last week, why the hell don't you just buy the Airport or open state run supermarkets yourself oh great leader?

While you are at it why don't you follow Cullen's lead, as Mugabe followed his lead last week, and nationise all private companies.

We could get around high prices buy opening state run gas stations, real estate agencies, banks, gyms, brothels, travel agencies and corner dairies. They could all be as successful as our hospitals, education system, police force and parliament.

Hang on a second perhaps that is not such a good idea.

Imagine the shortages, red tape, long queues and jobs for the boys.

Get the point people!

The state, let alone the stooges at the head of the Labour party couldn't run a bath, let alone the additional government departments the great leader obviously wants us to have.

Why not have everyone working for the government, at least then we can go back to a simpler gentler time, when everyone was happy and we all held hands and sung kombaya around a spluttering State funded fire.

Helen Clark's wish to follow a Neo Muldonism, and reconstruct New Zealand the way it was in Robert Muldoon's time is a scary thought, but that is where we are heading.

Muldoon knew in 1983-84 that he was going to find the 1984 election a tough one and he plundered every resource at his disposal to enable him to control almost every aspect of New Zealand life.

He nationalised everything he could, controlled the economy with an iron fist and spent so much money in his tenure at the top and buying that election that NZ INC was broke when the new Labour government of the day came into office and looked at the books.

One Roger Douglas was the architect in that Labour governments resurrection of the country and economy as he embarked on a radical plan that transformed our country and economy almost overnight.

It seems to be deja vu all over again in 2008. Helen Clark has the platinum taxpayer credit card in her hand and she is going to go well over the limit to buy your vote with your money.

In a time warp back to, 1984 Sir Roger Douglas is going to take a position in the Act Party, his first foray into politics in over 20 years and this time he is on the opposite side to her former party mates Clark and Cullen et al.

It seems to be a case of a perfect storm of politics crashing against a crumbling economy and an out of control bunch of power drunk socialists who will say, do and spend anything to retain their naked lust for power.

The addition this year of a recession and a possible deep recession at that makes the likelihood of a repeat of the class of 1984 almost a certainty.


Related Political animal reading

Labour's State control out of control
Labour's Socialist peril
Pointing fingers in the playground

c Political animal 2008

Monday, 10 March 2008

Unstoppable Global Warming

Something not reported in the mainstream media but it is another form of evidence that refutes man made global warming.

Unstoppable Climate Change

In this issue, NZCPR Weekly reports on implications from a New York conference on Climate Change (printer-friendly version>>>), Guest Commentator Czech President Václav Klaus explains that the global warming scaremongering is really an attack on freedom, the weekly poll asks NZCPR readers whether they agree or disagree with the government's proposed emissions trading scheme, and the NOTICEBOARD has details on how to win a copy of the New York Times bestseller "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 years".

I have just returned from an historic meeting of more than 500 people from around the world who gathered in New York to address the question of whether man-made global warming is really threatening the future existence of our planet. In attendance were some 200 scientists, economists and climate authorities, highly respected experts who are standing up to defend science against the tide of political opportunism, media dramatisation, and crowd hysteria that is propelling the global warming debate. In doing so these scientists and economists are putting their livelihoods at risk - their research grants, tenure, and ability to get published have all been threatened. Some have even faced death threats for speaking out against the global warming alarmism that is sweeping the world.

As a New Zealander concerned that our country is on the brink of passing new laws to counter global warming that will have a devastating effect on our standard of living, I wanted some answers. In particular, I wanted to know whether there is any scientific evidence that human-induced catastrophic global warming is occurring, since that is the sole justification for the economically damaging policies that Labour intends to push onto the country. I would like to share with you what I found.

Scientists have shown that in the earth’s geological past, concentrations of carbon dioxide have been up to 20 times higher than they are at present and temperatures have been considerably warmer. The two most recent warming periods occurred during Roman Times from 200BC to 600 AD and Medieval Times from 900AD to 1300AD, when Greenland was green and grapes grew in England. The Little Ice Age followed.

Current temperature trends show a warm period between 1920 and 1940, followed by a cooling phase. There was a sudden warming surge from 1976 to 1978 and another in 1998. Since then the weather has been cooler. The year 1934 has emerged as the warmest of the 20th century. This, along with the evidence of those historical warm periods, confirms that man-made greenhouse gas emissions cannot possibly be the cause of the earth’s warming.

The very latest scientific research shows that the climate operates on a 1,500-year cycle and is driven by a complex interaction of solar activity including sunspots and cosmic rays, winds, deep ocean currents, as well as cloud and precipitation cycles. It is a “chaotic” system which is very hard to predict. That is why it is almost impossible to forecast weather more than ten days in advance. For the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to pretend that their predictions of the earth’s climate in a hundred years time are accurate is fanciful, and for politicians to regulate their economies on the basis of such fantasy is grossly irresponsible.

The UN’s climate change panel – the IPCC – was set up in 1988 to assess the impact of human-induced climate change. This is a governmental body that was established to show firstly, that humans are causing global warming and secondly, to present the case for regulation.

In their latest report, released in 2007, the IPCC concludes that “most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations”. However, in the two years since the cut-off date for that report (May 2006), scientists have discredited that conclusion by showing that the IPCC used corrupted data, that proper forecasting principles were not followed, and that their statistical analysis was flawed.

A key problem that scientists have discovered is that the computer model outputs produced by the IPCC are at odds with observable results: in particular a central feature of the IPCC’s case for catastrophic global warming is a forecasted build-up of warmer air above the tropics, yet temperature records show that this is not occurring. Some of the excessive temperatures used in the IPCC’s models, which are presented as evidence of catastrophic warming have been traced to urban encroachment - temperature stations that were once located in the countryside are now surrounded by car parks, roads and other heat absorbing structures.

Scientists at the conference refuted emotive claims that polar bears are dying out due to a loss of habitat (claims which featured in Al Gore’s drama, “An Inconvenient Truth” that is now screening in schools). They showed that Alaska’s polar bear population is stable, and Canada’s has increased by 25 percent over the last decade.

Claims that the melting snow of Mt Kilimanjaro is caused by global warming were shown to be wrong. In fact, the snow has been known to be melting since 1880 - deforestation at its base has reduced cloud cover increasing exposure to the sun.

Predictions of dramatic sea level rises were categorically discredited. The sea has been rising by a constant 18cm a century (1.8mm a year) and is thought to be driven by the melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. The fact that this started an estimated 18,000 years ago and is expected to continue for another 7,000 years, shows that humans are not to blame!

The President of the Czech Republic, Hon Václav Klaus, gave a keynote address at the conference and received a standing ovation. He is very happy that his speech is being featured as this week’s NZCPR’s guest commentary.

President Klaus, who spent most of his life under a communist regime, believes that global warming alarmism is essentially an attack on freedom. In his speech he explained: “Future dangers will not come from the same source. The ideology will be different. Its essence will, nevertheless, be identical – the attractive, pathetic, at first sight noble idea that transcends the individual in the name of the common good, and the enormous self-confidence on the side of its proponents about their right to sacrifice the man and his freedom in order to make this idea reality. What I had in mind was of course, environmentalism and its currently strongest version, climate alarmism”.

President Klaus went on to state that there are only three ways to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide: “we either have to stop economic growth and thus block further rise in the standard of living, or stop population growth, or make miracles with the emissions intensity”. He explained that the only realistic option is to stop economic growth and cut living standards, which is why he is so vocal in his opposition to the objectives of the IPCC.

Those New Zealand politicians who have jumped on the global warming bandwagon have been less than honest with us over the implications to this country. They have failed to spell out clearly enough that the main cost of joining up to the Kyoto Protocol (which, in spite of a 22 percent increase in our population, requires greenhouse gas emissions over the next four years to be reduced to 1990 levels) will be a dramatic cut in living standards.

Once the Emissions Trading Bill and the Electricity Amendment Bill are passed into law, a price for carbon dioxide emissions will be imposed on the New Zealand economy which will in effect tax growth and spread the costs across the economy. The lion’s share of that burden will fall on households.

Based on the government’s own predictions of $50 a tonne for carbon dioxide, petrol prices will rise by 12.2 cents a litre, and electricity by 20 percent. Once agriculture is brought into the scheme, farmers will be effectively taxed on the methane produced by their livestock with devastating costs – a 12 percent reduction in the payout for dairy, a 21 percent reduction for beef, a 39 percent reduction for sheep, and a 43 percent reduction for venison. The overall effect of this madness will be a stalling of growth and a decline in living standards.

So will our emissions trading scheme work? The experience of the European Union says not. The scheme has forced carbon-intensive industries to relocate to non-Kyoto countries, it has caused businesses to fail, and others to reduce their hours of operation. It has done nothing to reduce carbon emissions, but a lot to reduce economic growth. And all for nothing – there is no logical scientific reason to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The only reason is a political one.

As acclaimed journalist George Will wrote in Newsweek last year, if nations go ahead and impose anti-global warming policies, “the damage to global economic growth could cause in this century more preventable death and suffering than was caused in the last century by Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot combined.”

In a nutshell, the overwhelming conclusion from the Climate Change Conference in New York is that climate change is caused by natural forces not human activity. It is an unstoppable process and any attempts that are made to try to control it are futile, political and expensive.

Related Political Animal reading

Global Warning: Tax Iceberg Ahead
Kyoto critic comes to town - Sunday Star Times
Carbon Credit trading puts Global markets at exteme risk
Of Tulip Bulbs and Tooth Fairies

Ponder the Maunder - 15 Yr old Kristin Byrne explodes the GW myth

Links c Political Animal 2008

Sunday, 9 March 2008

Clark passes the buck on parenting

PHIL DOYLE/Sunday Star Times

It seems it is never too early in election year for the great
leader to be kissing babies.

If the photograph isn't scary enough, the fact that Clark is whispering around the traps that she may extend the pointless maternity leave to 13 months should put the fear of Allah into employers around the country.

It is hard enough for employers at present, given the extra expense laden on them by this welfare scheme.

They are seriously expected to keep a job open for 13 months? There is also talk of it applying after no minimum time at the applicant's job.

Not a good incentive to employ women dear Helen.

c Political Animal 2008

Auckland Electoral Finance Act protest 2008

Bob Clarke, WW2 Hero.

I shook this mans hand, Colonel Bob Clarke, a Veteran of WW2. He had large calloused old hands but it was a reasonably firm shake.

I thanked Bob for his efforts more than 60 years ago, to fight and possibly die for my right to freedom of speech. I was truly humbled in his presence.

He was too frail to march down
Queen Street, but he was there at Britomart to listen to John Boscawen and others fight against the anti democratic and anti free speech Electoral Finance Act.

Part of the 500 strong protest down Auckland's Queen St today in protest
over the anti free speech Electoral Finance Act.

Well, there was a small group of around 500 protesters who silently marched up the main Street of Auckland to protest this act.

I only heard about it myself on Thursday so it was a bit of a push for me to get there myself but myself and my good wife did.

No politicians were invited, but Jackie Blue, a Minister from the National party opposition was there at the front. Big balls Jackie! Shame your leader was too gutless to come down.

The march took about 20 mins to finish and there were speeches at Britomart when the crowd assembled with their placards and tape across their mouths, symbolising the right to free speech that the Electoral Finance act has now taken away.

Your's truly strangely quiet for a change. My
wife loved it!

Once again John Boscawen should be given much thanks for his efforts. He is organising more protests in the coming weeks all around the country.

The next march will be in Winston "Baubles" Peter's former seat, the sunny seaside
village of Tauranga. I will keep you all informed here about times and details.

Related Political Animal reading

Electoral Finance Act March Mar 9, 2008
Electoral Finance Bill Vote
NZ losses democratic freedom
Mike Moore turns the knife
List of MPs who voted for Act
Cartoon and comment
Auckland Protest against EFB
The purpose of the Bill is clear

Images & Content c Political Animal 2008

Electoral Finance Act protest Sunday 2.00pm, Mar 9, Auckland

If you don't know already, there is a silent march against the anti democratic Electoral Finance Act to be led by John Boscowan, up Auckland's Queen Street today, March 9 2008.

Meet at 2.00pm outside the Town Hall and the march kicks off at 2.30pm and continues to Britomart.

I was questioning my participation earlier this week but speaking to Winston Peters on Thursday made up my mind.

He asked himself if anyone's free speech had been affected by this Act and answered himself in the negative-a typical Winston "conversation".

Id like to remind readers that 21 year old Andrew Moore's website was shut down by the Electoral Commission because of it and even the Labour party were hoisted by their own petard this week when a DVD they produced and released recently breached the Act.

Please get out there and show you care about democracy. My wife and I will be there and are willing to be branded "obscure" and "extreme" by the great dictator on Monday morning.

I was excited on my first march in November but now I'm just pissed off.

Pictures and story to follow here latter.

Related Political Animal reading

Electoral Finance Act March Mar 9, 2008
Electoral Finance Bill Vote
NZ losses democratic freedom
Mike Moore turns the knife
List of MPs who voted for Act
Cartoon and comment
Auckland Protest against EFB
The purpose of the Bill is clear

C Political Animal 2008

Friday, 7 March 2008

Michael Cullen speaks with forked tongue

c Emmerson 2008

Some days it is hard to take Dr Cullen seriously. Today is one of those days.

While commenting about his tax cuts this year, engineered to buy the 2008 general election he let a sly one past.

I had a loud chortle to myself when listening to a Newstalk ZB audio clip live from the exciting port metropolis of Napier, that the main reason for New Zealand's record high interest rates was the current "credit crunch" that the world was facing and we would also be facing higher food and energy prices.

It slipped his mind(who's slippery now Mike), perhaps after a chardonnay or three, that the reasons for high interest rates and other rising prices was the fault of himself only.

Let me dispel the myths Dr Cullen!

Record high government spending by Labour on wasteful social engineering schemes has pushed up our official interest rates to 8.5% up from half that before Labour began its sentence on its citizens back in 1999.

A plethora of extra taxes including : employment, ACC, fiscal drag, electricity and gas taxes has led to higher inflation and therefore increased food prices.

What is really scary though is that Cullen is set to add even more taxes onto our already burdened and beaten economy in the form of a whole host of nonsense global warming taxes.

Up to 20c a litre of petrol will be added by local and state government this year and carbon credit trading will add additional cost to everything we buy, be it a service or product. In effect it is like another GST, except we don't know how much that extra cost will be.

Allan Bollard mentioned the added inflationary costs of these GW taxes but our mainstream media seemed to have collective ignorance over these basic economics.

Cullen has strangled the economy so hard with his overburdened taxes and spending, last month taxes actually dropped by over $700 million.

Don't be fooled, Dr Cullen is a bright man, regardless of his mis management of the economy over the last 9 years.

He has a philosophically socialist agenda though, with all its attendant consequences(and expenses) and he is clearly sticking to it come hell or high water.

More than ever now we need tax cuts, they stimulate economies, especially during dark times like these.

Dr Cullen's track record is poor, his handling of the economy during economic conditions the best we have had in generations borders on the slippery. He has crowed for the last 9 years about his results, given these conditions, which he had no influence on, but now abdicates that responsibility now that the brown stuff has hit the you know what.

Hang on, if you are a socialist you can take the plaudits for something you didn't do and abdicate responsibility for your failures, all at the same time keeping a straight face.

You cant have it both ways Dr Cullen.

Related Political Animal reading

Cullen's history on tax cuts comes back to haunt him
Global Warning: Tax iceberg ahead
Carbon credit trading puts global markets at extreme risk
Global Warming: Power to the people
Wednesday Political Soup: Edition 3
2nd story down - Let them eat cake

c Political Animal 2008

Thursday, 6 March 2008

Electoral Finance Act Protest: Auckland, 9 March, 2.00 pm, 2008

Email sent to Political Animal 4.00pm today

Silent Protest March against the Electoral Finance Act - This Sunday 9 March, meet outside the Auckland Town Hall from 2.00pm.

To my friends, family, business colleagues and supporters

In a democracy one of our most precious rights should be our right to speak out, criticize and campaign against the government – any government.

In passing the Electoral Finance Act parliament severely restricted our freedom to do so. This sets a dangerous precedent. The Human Rights Commissioner spoke out on behalf of all New Zealanders and called on the Government to withdraw the bill and start again. She was ignored.

We now have a law restricting what we can spend campaigning against the government that is less than half of what the Human Rights Commission and the Electoral Commission thought was fair.

What is worse, this new law will apply for over three times longer than the Human Rights Commissioner thought was reasonable.

For many decades New Zealanders have gone to war to protect our precious freedoms. We should not give them up lightly.

You now have a choice, you can simply accept that your freedoms have been restricted or you can stand up and protest and let the parliamentarians know that this is not on.

I am not prepared to sit back and do nothing. I am organising a SILENT protest march against the Electoral Finance Act this Sunday 9 March and I invite you to join me.

I would be very grateful if you could help me promote this march by bringing it to the attention of your family, friends and colleagues. I have attached a copy of the ad that appeared in The New Zealand Herald yesterday.

If we don’t stand up for our rights now we do not know what freedoms we may lose next.


John Boscawen, Trustee, Freedom of Speech Trust.

Box 42-267, Orakei, Auckland.

Related Political Animal Reading

Historical day as New Zealand loses democratic freedom

Auckland EFB protest lures 5000
Day of protest: Auckland NZ, Nov 2007
Electoral Finance Bill: The Purpose is clear
Cartoon & Comment, Emmerson: Winston Churchill Clark
List of MP's who voted for EFB
Extending middle finger in 2008

Links c Political Animal 2008

Tuesday, 4 March 2008

Cullen's move on Auckland Airport has far reaching effects
A cynical move by Michael Cullen to gain votes in the 2008 Election by
blocking an Auckland Airport sale will have far reaching effects.

Michael Cullen's move today to put a stop to a partial sale of Auckland International Airport(AIA) to the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board(CPPIB) has more far reaching effects than putting the brakes on this deal.

Below is the piece of legislation that has been changed, in relation to the airport merger, and it is sufficiently vague enough to cause major uncertainty, for investors, domestic and international, and business in New Zealand.

"Whether the overseas investment will, or is likely to, assist New Zealand to maintain New Zealand control of strategically important infrastructure on sensitive land."

Who decides what is "strategically important" and on what basis do they apply the new legislation?

Is the Warehouse(WHS) a strategic asset?

Business and investors need certainty, you only have to look at current market conditions to figure that out, and the new legislation leaves everyone guessing.

This uncertainty, apart from the retrospective legislation passed today, and mooted tax changes, means that foreign investors will be thinking twice before looking at putting their capital in a country that treats foreign investors like Putin's communist Russia treated foreign oil companies over the last few years.

It also means that private property rights don't mean anything in this country anymore(just like in Putin's Russia) and with the stroke of a retrospective pen your property isn't really yours anymore.

I own Auckland Airport shares, they belong to me and nobody else and in a free country I should be able to do what the hell I want to do with them.

Contrary to Labour party spin the Airport isn't a state asset, it is privately owned, by many individual Kiwis and and some bigger institutions and the playing of the "we cant sell such a "strategic asset to a foreign buyer" card makes no sense because it is already owned by 40% of off shore investors.

It seems to me that Labour playing this card in election year will be appealing to the paranoia of those people who think the National party are going to sell "strategic assets" and Labour will try to get votes from it.

Cullen mentioned that other countries have similar laws to prevent strategic assets from "going overseas"-although you would have to have pretty big container to fit the Airport into it and ship it off- they may well do or not but their laws were in in place before any important deals were being negotiated and to change conditions of a deal as it is being done is like playing the shell game with a blindfold while on crack.

The immediate affects of Cullen's finger in your pie has been enormous. Billions of dollars have been lost from the capital value of Auckland Airport and therefore shareholder's pockets. The NZX's other companies plunged in value today because of the uncertainty that Cullen's pen stroke brought to the market.

Other companies who may be deemed "strategic" by Cullen and his communist misfits will be wringing their hands in the hope they wont be next. The listed power companies, ports and others will clearly be affected.

The interest still in the wings by Australia's Origin Energy for its sister company Contact Energy(CEN) would seriously be in doubt under the new criteria. Similarly other foreign companies will consider our country's barriers too hard to negotiate. Takeovers and mergers, an essential part of successful capitalism, will prove too cumbersome to consider.

As I have canvassed before in previous articles, Cullen's move now appears to be arrogant in the extreme. His party and lapdogs in crime, Winston "Baubles" Peter's NZ First, made their feelings clear when takeover talks were mooted with Dubai Aerospace Enterprise almost 9 months ago and they were staunchly against any sale.

To move now is unlawful(it was but they will change that law) immoral and is a clumsy attempt at gaining votes from voters who think capitalism is a dangerous thing.

The cost to CPPIB and Auckland Airport shareholders has been many millions-on top of the couple of billion in lost capital for Auckland Airport shareholders.

I have been a very impassioned advocate for not selling my shares over the last 9 months, because I could see the investment as a good long term one.

I was tempted, when news first broke of a sale all those months ago, to sell at the market price that day of around NZ$3.65 but decided not to. Now I think those people who sold were wise beyond any education one could buy.

Given the interference over the last few weeks I am now going to give two ticks for the deal, it may send a message to Labour what the real owners of this asset want to do with their property but I doubt whether Cullen will listen or care.

I know this deal isn't going to happen and have said so for many months now but the interference by politicians in private property issues has me questioning my holding in such a company mired in political dead weight and sticky fingers.

I sold my Port of Tauranga shares a few years back because I couldn't contend with local Auckland politicians and Winston Peters(again) interfering in merger proposals with Ports of Auckland. That deal was ended after months of expense for Port of Tauranga.

Business needs certainty in New Zealand, especially now as the proverbial is hitting the fan hard.

That means overseas investment is needed. Today's approach by by the extreme left wing business haters in Labour and NZ First has been another nail in the coffin for NZ INC because that much needed capital is going to dry up.

The move today is reminiscent of a much troubled National Government, led by Robert Muldoon, who in its final months, regulated and nationalised the life out of our economy and then went on to lose an election in 1984 in spectacular fashion.

Ironically it was Labour who then swept into power and with the wise direction from Roger Douglas transformed the economy into a far more sustainable one.

Sadly Douglas was stopped before he was finished, by the very same people who have foisted the current heavy burden on our economy today.

Only fools don't learn from history and surely Cullen, a Dr of History himself(not in business or economics) shouldn't be as foolish as he has been over the last few weeks.

We surely cant afford a repeat.

Related Share Investor reading

Fran O'Sullivan: Cullen's shock move hinders Airport bid
Cullen's move on AIA tax plan Anti-Business
NZ Herald: Airport Deal not so sweet after tax break blocked
NZX Press Release: AIA directors recommend shareholders sell
AIA profit stays grounded
Softening opposition to CPPIB bid for AIA
Directors of AIA bribe brokers not to sell
What is Auckland Airport worth to you?
Second bite at AIA by CPPIB might just fly
AIA new directors must focus on shareholders
Auckland Airport merger deal nosedives
The Canadians have landed
AIA incentive scheme must fly out the window
Government market manipulation over AIA/DAE deal
DAE move on AIA: Will it fly?

Disclosure: I own AIA shares

c Share Investor & Political Animal 2008

Monday, 3 March 2008

Herald Poll and Political Animal commentary
c Stan Blanch 2008

While in her own mind and those of her Labour party colleagues, Helen Clark is still the preferred Prime Minister , the all important voters are thinking something else entirely.

This morning on Newstalk ZB Aunt Helen blamed "volatility" in the polls, when talking about the loony Greens support wavering wildly since the Heralds last poll and by implication the idea was that the poll was not to be trusted. She had another go at the paper for its poll accuracy.

This and the polls of the last 10 weeks cannot be ignored by the former high flying minister.

A definite trend has emerged and the outcome looks like a hiding for the Labour party not seen in generations.

Voters could be forgiven for forgetting about party allegiance's and voting for a winning party, National, least they waste their vote on the big loser.

Hitch your train to the wagon Abner, cause its on a non stop trip to Wellington to take out the trash.

Key Joins his party at No 1 position

5:00AM Monday March 03, 2008
By Audrey Young, NZ Herald

John Key (right) has overtaken Helen Clark as New Zealand's preferred Prime Minister.

John Key (right) has overtaken Helen Clark as New Zealand's preferred Prime Minister.

National leader John Key has overtaken Prime Minister Helen Clark in popularity in the latest Herald-DigiPoll survey, and his party has extended its lead over Labour to 18 points.

It is the first time since May last year that Mr Key has been ahead of Helen Clark as preferred prime minister, although his lead is only two points.

National has been ahead of Labour since Mr Key became National leader in December 2006 but apart from a surge in his popularity in May because of his role in the anti-smacking-bill compromise, Helen Clark has convincingly led the preferred prime minister polling. That has reinforced the view that despite poor party polling, she is Labour's strongest asset.

But in the past month, Mr Key and the National Party have both gone up 7 points in the survey.

Mr Key is preferred by 46.3 per cent of decided voters and Helen Clark by 44.3 per cent in the poll, conducted between February 11 and 28.

In January, Helen Clark was ahead of Mr Key by 10.5 points.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters polled 3.3 per cent. Trade Minister Phil Goff, often tipped as the next Labour leader, scored no support as preferred prime minister.

The gap between the two main parties is so wide and coalition partners so limited for Labour - the Greens are below 5 per cent - that National could easily govern alone if the poll's figures translated to votes.

National is on 54.5 per cent (up 7 points), 18 points ahead of Labour on 36.5 per cent (down 2.2).

In the January survey, the gap between the parties was only 8.8 points.

Gender bias between the two leaders persists - men disproportionately favour Mr Key and women disproportionately support Helen Clark as prime minister.

The poll shows that voters aged over 60 have a strong bias towards National and New Zealand First.

It also shows that New Zealand First supporters have a strong preference for a coalition with National over Labour (90 per cent v 9.1 per cent) and that Maori Party supporters are not overwhelmingly disposed to a Labour deal - 57.1 per cent of Maori Party supporters would favour a deal with Labour, but 42.9 per cent would favour a deal with National.

The poll was conducted after an intense political start to the year in which both leaders made "state of the
nation" speeches and announced policies on youth crime, education and training.

Polling began after both leaders visited Waitangi, where Mr Key's meeting with Tame Iti received top billing, as did Helen Clark's aversion to Te Tii Marae.

Helen Clark hinted at media bias, saying last night through a spokesman: "Obviously the Leader of the Opposition has had a lot of publicity since the beginning of the year." She believed Labour polling was holding up and was reasonably close to the 1999 result - 38.74 per cent - when Labour took office.

"The important issue now is who has the best plan for the future," she said.

Mr Key did not believe he'd had more publicity than Helen Clark at the start of the year "and in fact she got enormous coverage from the [Sir Edmund] Hillary funeral ... not that that was political."

He believed they both received extensive, though contrasting, coverage at Waitangi.

He said he never thought his hongi with Tame Iti would damage him in the eyes of the voting public.

"I thought the mood of the nation has moved on and they started looking at Helen Clark fighting the battle that has been and gone and I think they responded positively to me wanting to engage and make a day of national celebration rather than harbouring some sort of historic dispute."

Support for the Greens is showing some volatility, falling to 4.4 per cent from 9.1 in the previous poll and 3.5 in the one before that.

New Zealand First is down 0.7 points on 2.1 per cent.

Falling below the 5 per cent threshold means neither party would win seats in Parliament unless they won an electorate.

Mr Peters has not yet confirmed that he will try to regain his former Tauranga seat, won last election by National's Bob Clarkson.

The Maori Party polled 1.5 per cent (up 0.5), United Future 0.4 (up 0.4), Act 0.4 (down 0.3) and the Progressives were unchanged on zero.

Tax cuts remain the issue most likely to influence votes, 20.7 per cent of those polled listing it top.

* The poll was of 734 respondents, and results presented are from decided voters only. The margin of error is 3.6 per cent.

Related Political Animal reading

Helen Shoots herself in both feet

Colmar Brunton Poll and comment

c Political Animal 2008